when faced with opposing views, the truth must be a bit different than both sides hold.
it is not true that when two disagree they must both be wrong.
when faced with opposing views, the truth must be a bit different than both sides hold.
And for the same number of times. I am asking about MAT. 5:17-18 not any other passages.for like the 15th time...
Romans 7:6we have been delivered from the law, having died to what we were held by, so that we should serve in the newness of the Spirit and not [in] the oldness of the letter.as a Christian i am not under the Law of the covenant with Israel made at Horeb. my High Priest is not of Levi.
am i saying the Law of the old covenant with Israel is taken away? no. i am saying whether it still exists or not has no bearing on me because that law has no jurisdiction over me; it isn't the covenant into which i was adopted.
So long as both agree, then both can be right, If what they agree on is fully in line with the Whole of Scripture. If not, then there is a real good chance both have something wrong. Oh unlessss one is perfect,, which I know nether of us are. How do I know this? Everyone is a sinner, so we can't be perfect.it is not true that when two disagree they must both be wrong.
John 5:24Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life.
Please explain. I will need to know dates as close as you can get them, who, and how.Which would mean it has already occurred.
It is me saying you misunderstand it. If one is physically dead they don't move, think, or talk. As you do this, you are dead pysically. If one is dead spiritually, they can't love, or learn truths that are placed before them. Nor can they grow, or learn Who HaShem is. They must have the spirit in them to do any of the above. So once agian I say you are not dead. As you have shown that I say the Scripture lies, looks like I get to stay.well,
see below:
the gospel says i have died, and you say i have not.
when i showed you two witnesses attesting to this fact, you replied "wrong"
what is this except for you saying scripture is wrong?
You can be a lot more direct by explaining ONLY MAT. 5:17-18how much more direct can i be?
Romans 6:14sin shall not have dominion over you,for you are not under law but under grace.
OK let me try this one last time, then I am done. If you can't look at Mat.5:17-18 ONLY then you wish to lead this in a circle, I am so tired of talking in circles. So please, LOOK AT Mat.5:17-18 and explain them. Nothing from any other book, or chapter, only MAT. 5:17-18. Does that make it REAL CLEAR what I am looking for. It should as I have asking for the same thing for some time now.**ahem**
Romans 7:1do you not know, brethren (for I speak to those who know the law), that the law has dominion over a man as long as he lives?Romans 7:6now we have been delivered from the law, having died to what we were held by, so that we should serve in the newness of the Spirit and not the oldness of the letter.Galatians 3:10For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them."
I started out giving my understanding of every passage posted. Yet have, (As best I remember), never had an answer to a direct question. As it stands now, I am done. Oh I will still post, only I will not reply to anyone until they give their understand of 2 simple passages. A simple thing to do for any that claim an understanding, and will go a long way to finding THE truth. Not mine, yours or anyone's, THE TRUTH.just reading your responses to other people seems like you never have any response to the point but just immediately go to carnal arguing yet never touching the point the other person is making it seems like a circular argument no matter who you are discussing with
I am doing this in a reply to you, as I am in hopes that if my understanding is wrong, you will stay with this passage and show me how. I do hope you find this informative. I am going to do what I have asked others to do, and they seem to over look it.Regarding the first covenant… Jesus Christ FULFILLED it for whoever will believe and receive HIS HUMAN FULFILLMENT of the Law for us.
His Body is the human fulfillment of obeying the Law; and
His Blood is the human fulfillment of disobeying the Law.
The first covenant is completely fulfilled IN CHRIST ALONE for every believer.
Regarding the Second covenant of Grace, simply requires faith to believe and understand and live by God’s Grace…
knowing we are forgiven, loved and accepted and ushered into a relationship with God - the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
There was nothing in your OP asking a direct question about two specific passages. You did include two passages, but not as "What does this mean to you?" So go ahead and post the two passage you want addressed. You have said a lot of negative stuff, but let's cut to the chase. You give us your understanding and ask us if that is also our understanding of those two passages (whichever they are).[/QUOTE][QUOTE="Rainrider, post: 5176090, member: 257575"]I started out giving my understanding of every passage posted. Yet have, (As best I remember), never had an answer to a direct question. As it stands now, I am done. Oh I will still post, only I will not reply to anyone until they give their understand of 2 simple passages.
The answer to you question is within this verse itself.Mat 5:17¶Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
Now here "the Law" applies to the entire OT (Tanakh). And since all has not been fulfilled (including the establishment of the New Heavens and the New Earth) the OT remains an important part of the Bible. This is a reference to all the prophecies waiting to be fulfilled.Mat 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
Circa 70 ADPlease explain. I will need to know dates as close as you can get them, who, and how.
Mat 7:14Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
I am happy with everything HaShem does. However it not the Word I disagree with, it is mans understanding. You see, like almost everyone, you passed over the FACT that the prophets are tied to the Law. There in lies the problem. As humans, we do get things wrong, when it comes to the Word, one tends to over look any part that doesn't fit their understanding. Again, I do understand this, as I was thought the Law had been removed.The answer to you question is within this verse itself.
1. Christ contrasts "destroy" with "fulfil". So what is destroy? It is to "put an end to the existence of something by damaging or attacking it." Christ never damaged or attacked the Law since it is His own Law, and He is the one who gave it. But He did come to fulfil it, and He did so in many ways.
2. At the same time 2 Corinthians 3 and the book of Hebrews clearly tell us that the Law was to be REPLACED and ABOLISHED -- set aside. That was God's plan all along since He panned for the New Covenant to go into effect the day Christ died.
So why are you not satisfied with God's decision?
Now here "the Law" applies to the entire OT (Tanakh). And since all has not been fulfilled (including the establishment of the New Heavens and the New Earth) the OT remains an important part of the Bible. This is a reference to all the prophecies waiting to be fulfilled.
Please show when Circa made a t7 year treaty, bosted he was god, and sat in the holy of hollies.Circa 70 AD
Another USELESS response, when you received the proper interpretation. And since I included the whole Tanakh in the second half, I did not omit the prophets. So you simply have an arrogant response to proper interpretation. A total waste of time.I am happy with everything HaShem does. However it not the Word I disagree with, it is mans understanding. You see, like almost everyone, you passed over the FACT that the prophets are tied to the Law.
Circa isn't a name. It just means around or approximately.Please show when Circa made a t7 year treaty, bosted he was god, and sat in the holy of hollies.
The OT describes the Third Temple giving dimensions and design details.. So for me i believe the 3rd temple will be an actual structure.. Built during the future 1000 year reign of the LORD Jesus in Jerusalem.. You can read the description of the temple In Ezekiel chapters 40 to the end of 48..
That is not the third temple but the FOURTH temple.
Temple #1 -- Solomon's temple
Temple # 2 -- Ezra-Nehemiah's temple later modified by Herod
Temple #3 -- That which will be built by Orthodox Jews in the near future, but will be hijacked by the Antichrist.
Temple #4 -- Ezekiel's temple after the Second Coming of Christ
Jerusalem and Mount Zion feature prominently in Bible prophecy. And that is why God's hand remains on the unbelieving nation-state of Israel. Trump was 100% right in wanting Jerusalem to be the capital of Israel.